Evidence from History and the Gospels that Jesus Spoke Greek

By Corey Keating











Professor Ed Nelson
NS500 New Testament 1 Term Paper
Fuller Theological Seminary
Phoenix Extension
Fall Quarter 2002-3

The evidence is as yet inconclusive as to what language Jesus would have normally
spoken to the Jewish crowds or to his disciples. However, for nearly the last century, it has
become practically a generally accepted tradition that the mother tongue of Jesus, the language
he knew best and therefore usually spoke, was Aramaic.
1
This is mainly due to the conclusions
of Dalman,
2
who stated that, though Jesus may have known Hebrew, and probably spoke Greek,
he certainly taught in Aramaic.
3
Some New Testament scholars have even gone as far as to say
that Jesus only spoke in Aramaic.
4
Based on more recent historical research and linguistic data,
the purpose of this paper is to show that Jesus spoke Greek, had the linguistic ability to teach in
Greek, and at times may indeed have taught in Greek. There may, in fact, exist instances
recorded in the Gospels where Jesus conversed and possibly taught in Greek. After this fact is
established, this paper will call for a more serious consideration of the implications of this
possibility by New Testament scholars and highlight the need for more research in this area.
This paper will focus on the Biblical text from both an historical and literary perspective.
First of all, it will give a brief overview of what is known historically of the languages spoken in
first-century Palestine. This will serve to establish the scope of Jesus linguistic possibilities and
then to determine what languages Jesus probably spoke. It will next give an analysis of the words
of Jesus that are recorded in the Gospels, particularly the occurrences of Aramaic words in the
Gospel of Mark, in order to further determine what languages Jesus spoke. Lastly, it will
examine a particular case study from a Gospel pericope in which it seems most probable that we
can ascertain the very Greek words that Jesus spoke.

1
J. N. Sevenster, Do You Know Greek? How much Greek could the first Jewish Christian have known? Translated
by J. de Bruin (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1968), 33.
2
See G. Dalman, Jesus-Jeshua: Studies in the Gospels (trans. P.P. Levertoff; London, SPCK 1929).
3
Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek? Tyndale Bulletin, 44 (1993), 199.
4
G. R. Selby, Jesus, Aramaic & Greek (Doncaster, England: The Brynmill Press Ltd, 1989), 4; (Referring to J.A.T.
Robinson, Can We Trust the New Testament, Oxford, 1977, pg. 31).
Page 2
Limitations and Assumptions
Because the majority of scholars have previously made the assumption that Jesus
normally taught in Aramaic, there has been much research and numerous volumes written over
the last century analyzing the Aramaic statements of Jesus in order to ascertain what type of
Aramaic Jesus actually spoke. Furthermore, since the time of Dalman, many scholars have
operated under the assumption that the Hebrew-speaking Jews of Palestine actually spoke
Aramaic, and not Hebrew. Hence it is assumed that, wherever mention is made of the Hebrew
language in the New Testament , Aramaic is what is actually meant.
5
But even this can no
longer remain uncontested. It appears from more recent archeological and linguistic evidence
that in Jesus day Hebrew occupied a more important position than was formerly thought.
6

Various scholars have concentrated on this topic so that they would understand how to most
properly take up the task of trying to get back to the actual words of Jesus by retro-translating
from Greek into the appropriate dialect of Aramaic or Hebrew. The discovery of the Dead Sea
Scrolls has shed much light on this area of study. However, because this paper is contending for
the role of Greek in Jesus ministry, it is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss what dialect of
Aramaic or Hebrew that Jesus might also have spoken.
Furthermore, due to this assumption that Jesus only taught in Aramaic, since the late
nineteenth century scholars have argued for the existence of Aramaic sources for the Gospels,
and even in extreme cases for Aramaic originals for the Gospels themselves.
7
Nigel Turner, a
reputed Greek linguist, says that stylistic evidence suggests that it is too extreme to think that

5
J. N. Sevenster, 34; (Referring to G. Dalman, Die Worte Jesu, 2
nd
, 1930, p. 1).
6
Ibid., 34.
7
Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight, eds., Languages of Palestine, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers
Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 443.
Page 3
the gospels were written at first in Palestinian Aramaic.
8
I agree with Turner and others that
although the probability that Aramaic or Hebrew sources for the teaching of Jesus did exist at
an earlier stage cannot be excluded, it seems more probable that the Gospels themselves were
written in a kind of Greek which was inoculated with Semitic syntax and style.
9
Whether or
not there existed earlier oral or written sources from which the current Gospels were written, I
concur with the scholarly consensus,
10
and it is the assumption in this paper, that the Gospels
which we currently possess were originally composed in Greek and are not literalistic
translations from an Aramaic or Hebrew original. The most that can safely be said is that an
Aramaic sayings-source or sayings-translation lies behind the synoptic gospels.
11
It is beyond
the scope of this paper to discuss the current scholarship or give an historical outline regarding
possible Aramaic sources for the Gospels.
12

In the last couple centuries there has also been much research done regarding the type of
Greek that was spoken in ancient Palestine. Even more pages have been written regarding the
kind of Greek that was used in writing the New Testament. This paper will not discuss the dialect
or kind of Greek Jesus and other ancient Palestinians would have spoken, nor the kind of Greek
used to write the Gospels. Once the fact has been established that ancient Palestine was a
bilingual or trilingual society, it seems intuitive that the Greek of the Gospels is one that will

8
Nigel Turner, Style, vol. 4 of A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J.H. Moulton (Edinburgh: T&T Clark,
1976), 5.
9
Ibid., 2.
10
Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 209.
11
Nigel Turner, Grammatical Insights into the NT, (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1965) pp.174-88 ; reprinted in Stanley
E. Porter, The Language of the New Testament: Classic Essays (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 175-6.
12
For more research on this matter see Nigel Turner, Style, vol. 4 of A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J.H.
Moulton (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1976), Chapter 2, Sources Behind the Gospels; and cf. Joel B. Green and Scot
McKnight, eds., Languages of Palestine, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press,
1992) 443-4; in order to read the arguments supporting Aramaic sources for the Gospels, see Maurice Casey,
Aramaic Sources of Marks Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).
Page 4
have numerous incursions from the Aramaic language, which many Jewish people spoke as their
primary language.
This paper also assumes the two-document (or four-document) hypothesis for the
Synoptic Gospels with Mark being the first Gospel that was written.
13
This assumption fits in
well with my thesis since it is Mark who uses the most Aramaic terms, which are analyzed
below.
Languages Used in Ancient Palestine, Particularly in Galilee
Before looking at linguistic data, it is important to consider the historical and sociological
context of first-century Palestine in order to determine what languages were customarily spoken
in that region. This will help determine the range of languages that first-century Palestinians
spoke and thus the probable languages of Jesus. The presentation here will only be a brief survey
of the conclusions drawn by the many thorough studies that have been done on this topic. It will
be shown here that the evidence points to the fact that first-century Palestine was multilingual
with at least Aramaic and Greek widely spoken. Some form of Hebrew possibly was vernacular,
but it was surely a written language. Latin was used primarily by the Romans in political and
administrative matters.
14

The two languages pertinent to this discussion are Aramaic and Greek. Whether or not
Jesus spoke Hebrew is not as germane to this topic. It is commonly recognized among most
scholars that it would seem that Aramaic was the best-known and most widely used language
among Jews of all classes in Galilee and in Judea also, at least in the larger urban areas.
15

However, at the same time it is recognized by many that There is evidence that Greek was a

13
Cf. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight, 784-92.
14
Stanley E. Porter, The Language of the New Testament: Classic Essays (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,
1991), 27.
15
Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight, 439.
Page 5
living tongue among first-century Jews even around Jerusalem.
16
But significance of the
widespread use of Greek has been so often overlooked in its bearing upon the question at hand.
Therefore, the following discussion will highlight some of the evidence for Greek being a more
widespread language in first-century Palestine than some scholars have recognized. It will be
shown that Greek was not only the most common language among gentiles in the Roman
Empire, but was a widespread language even among the Jewish nation.
It has been universally acknowledged by virtually everyone who has studied the matter
that Greek was the lingua franca of the Graeco-Roman world and the predominant language of
the Roman Empire.
17
Because it was the language of the Empire, it held a place of prestige in
that it dominated the political, educational, and economic environment even of Palestine itself.
This means that there would have been cultural, social and especially linguistic pressure to learn
Greek in order to communicate broadly within the social structure.
18
Furthermore, evidence
continues to increase regarding the strong influence of the Greek language and culture in lower
Galilee, the region where Jesus grew up. Highlighting the evidence of Hellenistic influence in
Galilee is the fact that Matthew refers to that region as Galilee of the Gentiles.
19
Jesus
hometown, Nazareth, was located just four miles from the largest Galilean city, Sepphoris which
was a Hellenistic-Roman city where the Hellenistic culture, not Judaism, was dominant.
20
This
Hellenistic culture, which implied the use of Greek, dominated every aspect of life and
society.
21
In summarizing the importance of this region as a trade route, surrounded by

16
Nigel Turner, Style, 8.
17
Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 205.
18
Ibid., 209.
19
Matt 4:15. Unless otherwise noted, the scripture verses contained herein are from the New Revised Standard
Version Bible, copyright 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of
Christ in the U.S.A., and are used by permission. All rights reserved.
20
Paul J. Achtemeier, Joel B. Green and Marianne Meye Thompson, Introducing the New Testament: Its Literature
and Theology (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), 39.
21
J. N. Sevenster, 96.
Page 6
Hellenistic culture, the greatly respected Greek linguist Stanley Porter says, it is not legitimate
to think of Jesus as growing up in linguistic and cultural isolation. Nazareth was situated along a
branch of and had a position overlooking one of the busiest trade routes in ancient Palestine, the
Via Maris, which reached from Damascus to the Mediterranean.
22
Thus New Testament
historian H.C. Kee concludes, This means that for Jesus to have conversed with inhabitants of
cities in the Galilee, and especially the cities of the Decapolis and the Phoenician region, he
would have had to have known Greek, certainly at the conversational level.
23

Besides recognizing the strong Hellenistic culture in this area, literary and epigraphic
evidence is even stronger in showing the widespread knowledge of Greek throughout Palestine,
including Galilee. In addition to the Greek inscriptions found on coinage from first-century
Palestine, there have been numerous papyri and literary texts discovered in that area that have
been written in Greek. Many of these documents were written not only by Greek-speaking
gentiles, but also by Jews. The papyri of the Judean Desert include two Greek letters recording
correspondence between the Jewish commander Bar Kokhba and his lieutenants. Even though
this is from the second century, it does help to establish the fact that Greek was widely used even
among Jews shortly after the time of Christ. Fitzmyer says, at a time when the nationalist fever
of the Jews must have been running high the leader of the revolt frankly prefers to write in
Greek, or at least has to write in Greek.
24

As far as Jewish literature is concerned, there is also significant evidence of Jews in
Palestine writing in Greek for Jewish audiences. For instance, the deuterocanonical form of
Daniel has sections written in Greek and the two apocryphal books of 1 Esdras and 2 Maccabees

22
Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 211.
23
H.C. Kee, Early Christianity in the Galilee: Reassessing the Evidence from the Gospels, in Levine (ed.), Galilee
in Late Antiquity, 21; quoted in Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 212-213.
24
Joseph A. Fitzmyer, A Wandering Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays. (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979)
pp. 29-56; quoted in Stanley E. Porter, The Language of the New Testament: Classic Essays, 143.
Page 7
are thought likely to have been composed in Greek in Palestine.
25
Furthermore there have
been a number of Greek Old Testament fragments from the minor prophets found in the
Marabbaat caves, probably from a late first century A.D. scroll.
26

There is also inscriptional evidence that confirms the significant and widespread use of
Greek throughout Palestine, even in conjunction with Jewish religious practices. Greek
inscriptions have been found on Jewish synagogues and even on Jewish sepulchral inscriptions.
The first impression one gains from these data is that Greek was the language of the great
majority among the Jews in the Imperial period, probably of more that two-thirds of them.
27

This same tendency for epitaphs to be composed in Greek is found also in Jerusalem, the most
Semitic of cities. The only natural explanation for this phenomenon is that Greek was the
language of their daily life.
With all this evidence at hand (only briefly outlined here), it seems clear that although
Jesus spoke Aramaic and probably taught in Aramaic for much of his ministry, it is also fairly
certain that Jesus spoke Greek and could have taught in Greek at certain times of his ministry.
The great Greek linguist James H. Moulton says, that Jesus Himself and the Apostles regularly
used Aramaic is beyond question, but that Greek was also at command is almost equally
certain.
28
It would be safe to say that,
It is not possible to settle the various issues regarding the linguistic milieu of first-century
Palestine, as Fitzmyer rightly notes, except to say that the archaeological, linguistic and
sociological evidence seems to indicate that the region was multilingual, including at
least Aramaic and Greek in widespread and frequent use. Therefore, the likelihood
that Jesus, along with most Gentiles and Jews, was multilingual himself is strong.
29



25
Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 216.
26
Ibid.
27
H.J. Leon, The Jews of Ancient Rome (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1960), 75-76; quoted
in Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 221.
28
J.H. Moulton, Prolegomena. 3
rd
ed., vol. 1 of A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J.H. Moulton (Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 1908), 8.
29
Stanley E. Porter, The Language of the New Testament: Classic Essays, 27.
Page 8
As a summary of this evidence, Porter says, This evidence clearly points to the
presumption that Jesus productive bilingual capacity included the ability to speak and possibly
to teach in Greek and, furthermore, that we may have several important contexts in which Jesus
spoke Greek.
30
Even Maurice Casey, a theologian from the University of Nottingham who has
done much research in this area, and who disagrees with Porters and Turners conclusions about
the possibility of Jesus actually teaching in Greek
31
concedes, General evidence therefore
dictates that Jesus was brought up to speak Aramaic, and makes us take seriously the possibility
the he also knew Greek.
32

Jesus Aramaic Phrases Recorded in the Gospel of Mark
Having established the fact that Jesus probably spoke Greek and had the ability to teach
in Greek, it is important to then ask what is the significance of the Aramaic words used by Jesus
in the Gospels? Some of them, such as Beelzebul and Gehenna, appear to be proper names and
therefore have little bearing as to what language the speaker was using. Others, such as Passover,
Sabbath, Satan, and rabbi, must have been translated into Greek for centuries before Jesus was
born
33
and therefore would not technically be considered speaking Aramaic. For purposes of
this study we will analyze the three times in the Gospel of Mark that Jesus uttered what seemed
to clearly be an Aramaic verbal clause, namely those in Mark 5:41, 7:34, and 15:34.
In Mark 5:41 Jesus heals Jairus young daughter and says to her Talitha kum!
Presumably Mark understood that some of his audience could only understand Greek and not
Aramaic, so he then gives the Greek translation for these Aramaic words, namely, Little girl, I
say to you, get up! In a format very similar to this, first giving the Aramaic and then a Greek

30
Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 205.
31
Maurice Casey, Aramaic Sources of Marks Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 63 ff.
32
Ibid., 81.
33
G. R. Selby, 21.
Page 9
translation, in Mark 7:34 Jesus heals a deaf person with the Aramaic word, Ephphatha! which
Mark then translates for his readers as Be opened! Why did Mark record the Aramaic words
that Jesus spoke and then give his readers the Greek translation? It is difficult to understand why
Mark would have recorded the Aramaic words of Jesus if that were the language in which he
normally spoke. If that were his customary language, why is it that Mark did not regularly record
his statements in Aramaic? Or why did he bother to record these and not other statements?
(Compare Mark 1:25, 1:41, 2:5, 4:39, and 5:8-9, which have similar linguistic structures, but do
not record Aramaic transliterations.) It could indicate that this was not the normal language Jesus
spoke, but he felt compelled to do so when addressing individuals who only spoke Aramaic.
Nigel Turner says,
As long ago as 1891 T.K. Abbott argued effectively in favour of Greek as the dominical
language, and one of his best submissions was that if Jesus regularly taught in Aramaic it
is difficult to explain why St Mark adopted the curious practice of reproducing only
some, and not all, of his sayings in Aramaic. One would think that the evangelist's
reason for reproducing this particular selection of transliterations is that, contrary to his
usual way, Jesus spoke in Aramaic on these occasions. The reason why is not so clear,
but on some of them he may have been addressing individuals whose sole language was
Aramaic.
34




There is another instance in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus is recorded as speaking
Aramaic followed with the Greek translation. Mark 15:34 records that just before Jesus died on
the cross he cried out with a loud voice, ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI? which is
translated, MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME? The Gospel of
Matthew also records these words and the subsequent translation.
35
In this instance it makes
perfect sense that these gospel writers would record Jesus Aramaic words, because they go on to
explain that some of the (presumably) non-Aramaic speaking bystanders thought that by the

34
Nigel Turner, Grammatical Insights into the NT; reprinted in Stanley E. Porter, The Language of the New
Testament: Classic Essays, 182.
35
Matt 27:46.
Page 10
words ELOI, ELOI, Jesus was calling on Elijah. The words in Greek would have no rhyme
with the word Elijah. Without recording the Aramaic words, the reader of Greek would be at a
loss as to why these bystanders thought that Jesus was calling out to Elijah. Thus the gospel
writers were forced to record the Aramaic words for their Greek speaking audience.
Based on these recorded sayings of Mark, we can say that Jesus certainly spoke Aramaic
on occasion.
36
Although these instances do not prove whether Jesus did or did not speak Greek,
the passages in 5:41 and 7:34 would be more easily explained by inferring that indeed Jesus
normally spoke Greek and the isolation of talitha cum and ephphatha and the like, as Aramaic
phrases surviving in the Greek gospels, might then be explained as rare instance where patients
of Jesus comprehended only Aramaic.
37

Was Jesus Conversation with Pontius Pilate Conducted in Greek?
Furthermore, knowing that in all probability Jesus did indeed have the ability to converse
in Greek, the question now remains as to whether or not there are any conversations recorded in
the Gospels that indicate Jesus spoke in Greek. One situation that must be considered carefully is
the record of Jesus trial before Pontius Pilate.
38
There are a number of factors that make this
situation worth considering. First of all, Pontius Pilate was a Roman governor that treated Jewish
customs with contempt
39
and it is therefore highly unlikely that he spoke any type of Semitic
language. Second, there is no mention of an interpreter being present during all the interactions
that took place between Jesus, Pilate, the Jewish leaders, and the crowds at this trial. Although
this does not prove that there was not a translator involved, the fast pace of the narrative,
recording conversation between Jesus and Pilate, Pilate and the Jewish leaders, and between

36
Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight, 442.
37
Nigel Turner, Style, 9.
38
Matt 27:11-14; Mark 15:2-5; Luke 23:2,3-5; John 18:29-38.
39
Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight, 615.
Page 11
Pilate and the crowds, argues against an intervening interpreter being present.
40
Assuming then
that there was not an interpreter present, the only language that would have been common to all
parties present would have been Greek. Therefore, it is most likely that Jesus spoke Greek to
Pilate.
It is interesting to note that in this particular instance the Gospels may have recorded at
least some of the actual Greek words of Jesus. This can be asserted based on the criteria of
multiple attestation and of dissimilarity. This account is not only given in all three of the
Synoptic Gospels but also in the Gospel of John. These appear to be two separate accounts of
Jesus trial since there is very little overlap in the details given or in words spoken, except in a
few words spoken by Pilate and Jesus. The words that overlap occur in the question Pilate asks to
Jesus and appear in all four Gospels, Lu .t e act.u; a| `Ieueata|, (Are you the king of
the Jews?)
41
Each one of the Gospels then record Jesus response as Lu .,.t;. (You say
so.) Whereas the Synoptic Gospels leave this simple answer standing as it is, the Gospel of John
adds more words, developing his answer to make it clear that he indeed claims to be a king: Lu
.,.t; et act.u; .tt (You say that I am a king
42
). It is interesting to note that the clause,
Lu . ,.t; occurs in no other place in the Synoptic Gospels (whether standing alone nor as part
of a larger clause), showing that these words are not some sort of redactional tendency of the
synoptic tradition.
Thus it appears that multiple sources attest to this occurrence, both the Synoptic and
Johannine traditions, and that this wording is completely dissimilar to other places in the
Synoptic Gospels. Therefore it seems probable that not only do we have the words that Pilate

40
Cf. Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 225; and A. Roberts, Greek: The Language of Christ
and his Apostles (London: Longmans, Green, 1888).
41
Mark 15:2, Matt 27:11, Luke 23:3, and John 18:33.
42
John 18:37.
Page 12
spoke to Jesus, but also two words that may have been a part of Jesus actual response in Greek.
There are other incidences recorded in the Gospels that may also record Jesus conversations in
Greek including: Jesus exchange with a Greek-speaking, Syrophoenician woman (Mark 7:25-
30; Matt 15:22-28) and Jesus meeting with a gentile centurion (Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:2-10).
These instances need further consideration, but it is beyond the scope of this paper to do analysis
on these and other such passages.
Observations and Conclusions
Based on historical data in linguistics, sociology, literature and epigraphy, the likelihood
is very high that Jesus was able to speak Greek and could have conducted some of his teaching in
that language. It seems reasonable the Jesus would have taught the Jewish crowds in some
dialect of Aramaic. However, with the current evidence concerning the widespread use of Greek
in first-century Palestine as the prestigious language of the Roman Empire, we cannot rule out
the possibility that Jesus also conducted some of his teaching in Greek. The fact that Jesus spoke
Aramaic is attested by the occurrences of Aramaic quotes recorded in the Gospel of Mark.
However, the existence of these occurrences can more easily be understood if we assume the
author was recording the Aramaic words as a language different from the one that Jesus normally
spoke.
Furthermore, other than the few times mentioned when the Gospel writers specifically
mention phrases in Aramaic and then translate into Greek, it is interesting to note that they never
reveal what language Jesus was using. This could be because they expected their readers to know
what language was being spoken, whether Aramaic or Greek. It could also be explained if we
assume that they were recording their message in the same language in which Jesus spoke,
Greek. If, however, they were recording their story in Greek, knowing that Jesus spoke most of
Page 13
his message in Aramaic, then we must draw the conclusion that they did not feel it crucial for
their reader to know what his original language was, nor what his original words were. If they
felt that it was the message about Jesus and not his ipsissima verba that were important, or if
indeed in recording his sayings in Greek they were recording some of his original words, we
must ask the question as to whether modern scholarship been searching in the wrong area by
trying to get back to the Aramaic sources behind the Gospels.
It seems that the possibility that Jesus spoke and taught in Greek needs to be considered
more seriously as the foundation for further research instead of hanging on too tightly to century
old assumptions. New Testament scholars working in this arena might do well to pay heed to
Stanley Porter when he says,
it seems to me that the evidence regarding what is known about the use of Greek in
ancient Palestine, including the cosmopolitan Hellenistic character of lower Galilee, the
epigraphic and literary evidence, including coins, papyri, literary writers, inscriptions and
funerary texts, but most of all several significant contexts in the Gospels, all points in one
direction: whereas it is not always known how much and on which occasions Jesus spoke
Greek, it is virtually certain that he used Greek at various times in his itinerant ministry.
This says nothing about the overall linguistic competence of Jesus, nor do we know
the frequency with which he used the languages at his disposal. But this conclusion at
least opens up the possibility of further exploration of this topic, since it must be
recognized that this conclusion has a solid foundation and cannot be ruled out on the
basis of presupposition alone.
43



43
Stanley E. Porter, Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek?, 235.
Page 14
Page 15
Selected Bibliography

Achtemeier, Paul J., Joel B. Green and Marianne Meye Thompson. Introducing the New
Testament: Its Literature and Theology. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 2001.
Black, M. and G. Fohrer, eds. In Memoriam Paul Kahle. BZAW, 103 (1968) pp. 17-28.
Reprinted in Stanley E. Porter. The Language of the New Testament: Classic Essays.
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.
Casey, Maurice. Aramaic Sources of Marks Gospel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1998.
Fitzmyer, Joseph A. A Wandering Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays. Missoula, MT:
Scholars Press, 1979, pp. 29-56. Reprinted in Stanley E. Porter. The Language of the New
Testament: Classic Essays. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.
Green, Joel B. and Scot McKnight, eds. Languages of Palestine. Dictionary of Jesus and the
Gospels. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992.
Lieberman, Saul. Greek in Jewish Palestine; Hellenism in Jewish Palestine. New York: Jewish
Theological Seminary of America, 1942. Reprint, New York: Jewish Theological Seminary
of America, 1994.
Moulton, J.H. Prolegomena. 3
rd
ed. Vol. 1 of A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J.H.
Moulton. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1908.
Porter, Stanley E. Did Jesus Ever Teach in Greek? Tyndale Bulletin, 44 (1993) pp. 199-235.
Porter, Stanley E. The Language of the New Testament: Classic Essays. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1991.
Selby, G. R. Jesus, Aramaic & Greek. Doncaster, England: The Brynmill Press Ltd, 1989.
Sevenster, J. N. Do You Know Greek? How much Greek could the first Jewish Christian have
known? Translated by J. de Bruin. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1968.
Turner, Nigel. Grammatical Insights into the NT. Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1965, pp.174-88.
Reprinted in Stanley E. Porter, The Language of the New Testament: Classic Essays.
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.
Turner, Nigel. Style. Vol. 4 of A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J.H. Moulton.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1976.